How long do you think the Furlough Scheme will realistically last?

[DreamChaser23]

Indefinitely until a vaccine is found?

I think it will probably have to be indefinitely. The other alternative is putting people on UC which might be less but still costly.

Broomstick “ And then the people in those sectors will lose their jobs, too, cresting spiral if job loss, so even if you do have an income, you will have far fewer options about what to spend it on.”

Most of us will need it for essentials, we won’t have money to spend on the non essentials that aren’t produced? Only the rich will have that.

@lilactree1

Very good point. I think many people, even in relatively safe jobs, will have been shaken by this and will decrease their discretionary spending massively.

Even when things start to be lifted many people will save rather than spend because they are worried about the economy and another lockdown later in the year (without the furlough cushion potentially).

@TazSyd if you read my post clearly that you'd know I actually asked if you thats what you said, I didn't insist you said anything. But you did the same to me with your delusional comment. Your comprehension is struggling a bit so probably best you don't engage with me.

I feel it is a bit harsh to say "why are we paying for their furlough" most of them pay tax and national insurance and are in a situation through no fault of their own.

Also if furlough ends, it will also affect you. Most people will have less income and that effects the economy in many ways.

However what this crisis has also showed us is that UC is not enough to live on. Contrary to what the Daily Fail says. But will the government increase UC. Unfortunately not a chance.

I also feel bad for those on benefits who have been screwed through 10 years. Many have died, sanctioned, lived poverty because they were seen as scroungers.

I read an article 2 or 3 weeks ago about furlough - probably in The Guardian but possibly the FT. Various options were suggested that were thought likely for workers who were most at risk of redundancy. As for those who are shielding, the writer seemed fairly definite that 'looking ahead' (by which he meant the second half of this year), shielding would be classed in with isolation and it would be treated as sick leave. I know it was stressed that it would mean SSP/other benefits could be claimed but where employers have a scheme that pays full salary when employees are off sick, it was suggested that it would be entirely the employer's decision whether staff would be paid in full.

@TazSyd

You are right. Even if just 10% of people change their spending habits, the economy is fucked. If 50% do it , I dread to think. This is just the start of a major economic problem which is going to cause tremendous financial pain for a lot of people. I can see the older generation who do tend to have more savings etc, having to pass this down early to help keep their children afloat.